Re: RFC 5006 status

[james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com>]

On Mar 18, 2010, at 06:15, Ole Troan wrote:
> 
> we already have proposals for doing other options in ND, which already exist in DHCP.
> should we reconsider the idea of a generic DHCPv6 option container option for ND?

I wouldn't support that.  We already have a protocol where merging a wide variety of configuration options for multiple sources is the main object of the game, and it's called DHCP.  I see no reason to insert all that complexity into the processing and emission of router advertisements.

I can see utility in the *limited* extension of RDNSS to standards track, because it allows zero-configuration hosts on IPv6 networks where all the routers advertise O=0 to have some hope of resolving domain names after joining them.  They don't get that today, and I don't see a good way to use DHCP to do anything about that.

Advancing RDNSS to proposed standard would be a recognition that the Domain Name Service is *not* like the other services that an IPv6 host may require dynamic configuration to use, i.e. it's not a luxury, it's expected to be universally available everywhere there is an IPv6 router.  I realize this would be a departure from the current architecture, where for reasons that I don't quite understand, the DNS is regarded as an "extra" feature of the Internet that's only relevant to special interest communities, and under no circumstances should it be regarded as a fundamental architectural component.  Still, I think it's worth reconsidering the question.


--
james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com>
member of technical staff, communications engineering